The third seed, Ed Broadbent fended off a spirited challenge from John Manley by a mere 17 votes - he'll advance to face the only upset winner of the first round, and only Liberal left standing, Frank McKenna.

The top seed, Robert Stanfield, had an easy ride in the first round and will face former Alberta Premier Peter Lougheed.

In a left versus right matchup, it will be Preston Manning versus Roy Romanow.

And, in a battle between two individuals who could very well win the entire tournament, it will be Greatest Canadian Tommy Douglas against the only 19th Century candidate left, George Etienne Cartier.

I posted yesterday about your biography on Ed Broadbent, but since the blog entry was from several days ago, I've realized that it will most likely not be seen. Therefore, since Broadbent is in the final eight, I feel compelled to write again here that the bio you posted of him is factually incorrect: you mixed up his conduct during the election of 1988 with that of John Turner (I know because I'm finishing a 30 pages paper on that election). It was Turner who wrapped himself in the flag, was considered to "win" the debate, and was the one who provoked the Conservative "bomb the bridges campaign." Broadbent preferred to stay away from the issue of free trade, though he opposed it. Instead, he focused on his "integrity as a leader" (this actually annoyed a lot of his supporters who had spent considerable money and effort creating anti-free trade propaganda). It was only toward the end of the campaign, when Broadbent realized he was losing support to the Liberals, that he really started to campaign hard against free trade.

jen; That was the intent. I figured Broadbent could have won the election (well...maybe not...but he could have beat the Liberals) had he played up the anti-FT Captain Canada Schtick while Turner sat back. So I pretty much flipped their roles (right down to the debate performance and the "bomb the bridge" strategy used against Turner) as the catalyst for Broadbent winning the election.

Is Nova Scotia doing it with coal? Is Ontario doing it with nickel and gold? Is B.C. charging $1/tree for every cut tree taken off crown land? Is NWT doing it with diamonds? Nope! Nope! Nope! Nope!

As a result of Lougheed's risk in irritating oil companies Alberta has no sales tax.

Lougheed as prime minister would have seen no need for the GST. He would have taxed minerals coming out of the ground instead (which would have benefitted all Canadians instead of multinationals and their shareholders).

You are right. A smart prime minister would take it to the same level as other countries.

Oil companies and other multinational companies giving executives 9-digit retirement packages (Exxon - $500M U.S.) should not have a problem with this considering they do not have to deal with terrorists or warlords to make a profit.

Lougheed was ahead of his time.

I remember asking at a Federal all-candidate's debate at Bishop Carroll why the federal government did not tax gold the same way they tax oil.

25 years later, multinationals get free reign of our resources in the name of jobs. The reality is, a small stumpage fee or royalty should be placed on all Canada's resources (including bottled water). The tar sands reveal that if you wait long enough, the value of the resource will far exceed cost.